Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
· ·
$5.16
▲ $0.12 (+2.4%)
Market data updated: 09/22 08:45 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/22/2026
News analyzed: 09/22/2026
Market Cap
$1.36B
Day Range
$4.98 - $5.17
52-Week Range
$4.98 - $12.32
Beta
—
Next Earnings
22.10.2026
Support
$4.98
Resistance
$6.64
-55.7% (1Y)
Strengths: 6/26 factors positiveRisk: High
This score and all analysis on this page are for informational and educational purposes only and do not constitute investment advice. Read the full disclaimer
Weighted: Technical 25% · Fundamental 20% · Growth 15% · Valuation 15% · News 10% · Quality 10% · Risk 5%
Overall Score
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 39.2%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
Operating margin
Operating margin: -10.2% (negative)
Fundamental
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 2 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 2
TIME ECHO identifies historical situations that resemble the current market state. Historical outcomes are not guarantees of future performance. Similarity does not imply causation, and results may change as new data becomes available.
🗓️ What Changed This Week
🌱 Building History
We don't have a real data point from a week ago for this stock yet. The weekly comparison will appear once enough history has accumulated.
📊 Score History
44
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
12d ago · $5.30
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 42 to 12 day-over-day
What happened after
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
🐻 Bear Case
🔍 What Could Prove This Wrong
This isn't a price-direction forecast — just a synthesis of real, already-computed data, and future conditions that could change the picture.
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
68
Quality
58
Value
50
Momentum
13
Risk
40
Sentiment
86
Fundamental
35
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of Coursera, Inc. has primarily centered on its financial performance and investor outlook, particularly its $85 million synergy plan aimed at improving profitability and margins. Analysts discuss whether the company can sustain growth and execution amid softer revenue trends, comparing it to peers in the consumer subscription sector during Q2 earnings. The focus remains on profitability, cost efficiency, and whether Coursera can maintain investor confidence amid market scrutiny of growth sustainability.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Coursera, Inc.. News trend score: 86. Reason: 8 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 2 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
29
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
41
Psychology
33
Fundamentals
35
Technical
13
Valuation
50
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The price is holding at a real, documented historical support/resistance level (a 50-day high or low).
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
-5%
Market Narrative
47
Fundamental Reality
41
Narrative Gap
+6
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for COUR suggests a narrative-reality gap (63 vs. 41) where extreme positive sentiment (100/100) dominates despite weak momentum (-0.9% ROC) and neutral technicals (RSI 46). The highest score (19) for *Euphoria*—despite minimal price momentum—implies investors may be overvaluing recent fundamentals or ignoring short-term underperformance. The lack of dominant state (null) and low volatility (0.92x ATR) suggests no clear panic or FOMO, but the gap hints at detached expectations. The key question: *Is the extreme sentiment justified by fundamentals, or is it a speculative bubble?*
Updated: 09/08/2026, 09:15 AM
👥 What the crowd believes
""Coursera's $85M synergy target and rising margins could reshape its profitability""
""Growth boosts valuation multiples, but it doesn’t always last forever""
""A Look Back at Consumer Subscription Stocks’ Q2 Earnings: Coursera (NYSE:COUR) Vs The Rest Of The Pack""
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 3D Investor Psychology
Signal classification confidence: Medium (confidence in the behavioral read, not a price prediction). Describes observable market behavior, not what any individual investor thinks, and is not a buy/sell signal.
🏛️ Investor DNA — Historical Investors
A Historical Strategy Simulation: assuming each investor follows their documented principles, how would they rate this stock today? This is not a prediction of what they would actually do.
🟢 Best match
Samuel Armstrong Nelson — 92/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with some investors seeing strong fundamentals and cyclical tailwinds while others flag red flags or dismiss it outright. The highest-scoring approaches—Bagehot’s liquidity focus, Graham’s defensive investing, and Nelson’s cyclical analysis—all suggest resilience and favorable timing, emphasizing stability, undervaluation, or oversold conditions. Conversely, Fisher, Loeb, and Livermore’s low scores reflect skepticism about quality, risk, or trend alignment, while the passive and contrarian camps (Malkiel/Bogle, Housel, Schwager) outright reject it as either inefficient or volatile. The gap between Lynch’s growth optimism (76) and Marks’ mixed but cautious stance (42) further highlights whether the stock’s potential is justified or already priced in.
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 92
Cycle position looks favorable — closer to oversold than overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟢 91
Attractive to a Defensive Graham Investor
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 87
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 78
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 76
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟢 69
Some discount, but not the deep 'net-net' bargain Graham's enterprising bar sets
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 62
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 62
Somewhere in the middle of the cycle
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 56
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 52
Mixed — a good business, but expectations may already be high
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟡 45
Reasonable but not a clear long-term holding
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟡 42
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 39
Risk profile Loeb would flag as a real threat to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 35
Mixed case — the evidence for picking this stock over an index is not strong
Key question
Do I actually have an edge here, or do I just think I do?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🔴 15
Negative trend — against Livermore's core rule of trading with the trend
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 0
The kind of volatility that tends to shake patient holders out
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 30%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 281 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (0 bullish · 10 bearish · 1 neutral)
A market-structure read based purely on real price and volume data — not full classic Wyckoff schematic identification (Phase A-E), but a quantitative analysis of what can reliably be computed: trading ranges, "effort vs. result", volume within the range, and Spring/Upthrust detection.
The stock is in a clear downtrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
High confidence
The Wyckoff Method, developed by Richard Wyckoff in the early 20th century, reads the balance of supply and demand through price and volume, based on the premise that large investors ("smart money") quietly accumulate shares before rallies and quietly distribute them before declines. The read here is based solely on real price and volume data — full, precise identification of classic Wyckoff patterns (such as Phases A-E) requires human chart-reading experience and judgment, so this is an approximate algorithmic read, not a substitute for professional analysis. This should not be considered investment advice.
Gross Margin
54.6%
Operating Margin
-10.2%
Net Margin
-6.7%
EBITDA Margin
-6.4%
ROE
-8.0%
ROA
-5.1%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$0.31
Cash
$792.60M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
2.51
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Not enough cash-flow data to calculate a DCF model for this stock.
Book Value per Share
$3.88
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$3.72
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 10 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 21.9.2026
Yahoo · 21.9.2026
Yahoo · 20.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 9.9.2026
MT Newswires · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Zacks · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
Business Wire · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 9.9.2026
StockStory · 9.9.2026
Yahoo · 7.9.2026
Zacks · 7.9.2026
Benzinga · 7.9.2026
Yahoo · 6.9.2026
MoneyLion · 6.9.2026
Yahoo · 4.9.2026
Zacks · 4.9.2026
Coursera, Inc. (COUR) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 44/100, rated "Weak". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
COUR currently scores 44/100 (Weak) across the categories we measure. StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — use this as one data point in your own research, not as investment advice.
COUR's technical score is 13/100, which currently reads as bearish — based on real price/volume signals (moving averages, RSI, MACD, and more), not a prediction of what happens next.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 39.2%; Net income growth: 35.8%; Operating margin is stable or improving over time.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Operating margin: -10.2% (negative); Net margin: -6.7% (negative); ATR: 4.6% of price.
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for COUR.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 4 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cardenas Alan B | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 9,139 | -9,139 | $5.71 |
| Hart Gregory M. | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 46,069 | -46,069 | $5.78 |
| Cardenas Alan B | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 1,355 | -1,355 | $5.78 |
| Cardenas Alan B | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 9,203 | -9,203 | $5.78 |
| Modica Marcelo | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 936 | -936 | $5.78 |
| Modica Marcelo | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 11,241 | -11,241 | $5.78 |
| ABBASI SOHAIB | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 34,260 | +34,260 | — |
| Ng Andrew Y. | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 34,260 | +34,260 | — |
| Paterson Lydia | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 34,260 | +34,260 | — |
| Maco Marylou | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 34,260 | +34,260 | — |
| McCarthy Christopher D. | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 34,260 | +34,260 | — |
| MITCHELL THEODORE | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 34,260 | +34,260 | — |
| SANDELL SCOTT D | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 34,260 | +34,260 | — |
| Chang Carmen | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 34,260 | +34,260 | — |
| MITCHELL THEODORE | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 106,230 | +34,260 | — |
| SANDELL SCOTT D | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 106,230 | +34,260 | — |
| ABBASI SOHAIB | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 125,597 | +34,260 | — |
| Maco Marylou | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 82,646 | +34,260 | — |
| Paterson Lydia | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 110,398 | +34,260 | — |
| Ng Andrew Y. | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 7,277,586 | +34,260 | — |
| McCarthy Christopher D. | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 120,206 | +34,260 | — |
| Chang Carmen | Grant/Award from Employer | 11.6.2026 | 122,520 | +34,260 | — |
| Insight Holdings Group, LLC | Open Market Sale | 20.5.2026 | 59,179 | -59,179 | $5.24 |
| Insight Holdings Group, LLC | Open Market Sale | 20.5.2026 | 935,596 | -935,596 | $5.24 |
| Insight Holdings Group, LLC | Open Market Sale | 20.5.2026 | 411,869 | -411,869 | $5.24 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
20,556,032 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 25,007,286 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
45.0% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 44.6% the prior week
Based on daily short-sale volume (Reg SHO) — a different metric from the open short interest above: this is daily trading volume, not an open position, so it updates weekly rather than biweekly.
Full breakdown of every data type and its source: Data Sources · Methodology